00:01:05 FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme
00:03:15 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.218.226] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
00:05:06 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
00:05:33 -!- mgsk [~Mark@li357-97.members.linode.com] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7]
00:06:43 -!- bbear [~bbear@3.0.98.84.rev.sfr.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:15:55 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:17:33 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
00:19:51 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-192-142.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
00:30:05 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
00:35:29 -!- arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
00:42:01 -!- FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
01:07:32 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
01:08:21 wtetzner [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
01:09:21 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
01:09:30 -!- wtetzner [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
01:09:31 wtetzner_ [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
01:09:42 -!- wtetzner_ is now known as wtetzner
01:10:36 araujo [~araujo@190.73.45.171] has joined #scheme
01:10:36 -!- araujo [~araujo@190.73.45.171] has quit [Changing host]
01:10:37 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme
01:19:17 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
01:23:25 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
01:24:43 homie [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-192-142.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme
01:25:24 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
01:35:47 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
01:37:38 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
01:39:07 -!- tuubow [~adityavit@c-69-136-105-164.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
01:46:49 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
01:49:18 -!- masm [~masm@bl18-32-176.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
01:54:02 So I'm converting all 20 vids to theora, so tommorow I plan on hitting sicp hardcore. Any tips, or is it pretty easy/clear read/watch though?
01:56:22 tomodo [~tomodo@gateway/tor-sasl/tomodo] has joined #scheme
02:04:32 Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme
02:05:13 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:05:49 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:06:57 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
02:12:09 -!- Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
02:16:17 cdidd [~cdidd@128-69-29-47.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme
02:16:41 -!- kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7]
02:22:08 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
02:23:32 -!- peterhil [~peterhil@xdsl-77-86-196-131.nebulazone.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:23:42 annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
02:23:42 -!- annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
02:23:42 annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has joined #scheme
02:24:10 youlysses: it's pretty easy to watch.
02:24:21 Like any universty course.
02:31:10 peterhil [~peterhil@xdsl-77-86-196-131.nebulazone.fi] has joined #scheme
02:36:40 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:36:46 Quadrescence: https://twitter.com/#!/swannodette/status/203111145337393153
02:38:00 Given that twits areless than 160 character long, wouldn't be more efficent to copy them directly instead of giving a url?
02:38:09 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
02:38:55 the URL is convenient if somebody wants to follow (etc)
02:39:40 pjb: i'm accustomed to having a bot sniff these, which is a civilised arrangement in other channels.
02:40:39 pjb: i do agree that without a bot, twitter urls are annoying.
02:43:23 I don't ahve a twitter account so I can't read the twit
02:44:29 neither do i, read it fine
02:46:25 -!- bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
02:46:42 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Quit: annodomini]
02:46:44 odd
02:47:29 it reads: Looks like all the authors of The Reasoned Schemer (William Byrd, Dan Friedman, Oleg Kiselyov) will be at StrangeLoop! #brain #explode
02:48:05 oh
02:48:14 I would like to go
02:50:01 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
02:51:09 annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
02:51:10 -!- annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
02:51:10 annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has joined #scheme
03:09:01 chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme
03:10:35 -!- turbofail [~user@38.99.37.210] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
03:12:59 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Quit: annodomini]
03:13:29 -!- amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61B69.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
03:19:05 lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has joined #scheme
03:19:41 -!- wtetzner [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
03:29:09 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme
03:35:07 wtetzner [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
03:51:11 xwl [~user@123.108.223.115] has joined #scheme
03:52:49 mark_weaver: (1) I don't have any strong opinion on associating methods with types or with generic functions -- I really don't care all that much about it. If I'd have to choose between the two I'd probably go with methods in generic functions, but this is unrelated to CLOS or not.
03:52:55 (2) Believe it or not, I also don't have problems with mutation... I'm not some kind of Haskellian fanatic who wants to abolish all mutations.
03:52:59 (3) The thing that I *do* have a *strong* problem with is breaking code. The mutation that `defgeneric' is doing is bad only in that it allows such breakages. And I can tell you that after I've been doing N years of hacking and CS, there is no way in the world that I would willingly use a language where some random code can break my own code; I consider such systems an immoral waste of collective time (and yes, Ema
03:52:59 cs does work -- but Emacs is a perfect example of wasting huge amounts of time this way).
03:53:06 (4) Perhaps you got the impression that I'm some kind of an OOP expert. That's wrong. I got interested in some OOP via my real fascination in all forms of reflection, and CLOS and later my Swindle was an exciting project in exploring this kind of reflection. I still think that the kind of bootstrapping that Tiny-CLOS is doing is an amazing gem -- but the actual side of using an OOP for modularizing code wasn't som
03:53:06 ething that I was particularly interested at, or that I did "real" work on.
03:53:10 (5) That applies also to the Racket OO system -- I use it when I need to and that's it. It does what it's expected to do, and I don't bother looking much further... But one thing that does bother me is people who come in with some vague impression that the Racket OOP is somehow based on Java or some similarly bogus idea. This is usually something that comes from people who divide the world into "CLOS or Java", and
03:53:10 they almost always blindly glorify CLOS as an unsurpassable peak of human creation, while looking the other way when you point at the problems CLOS leads to.
03:53:18 (6) Yes, that paper is not doing multiple dispatch, I don't know why asumu brought it up (and it should be clear now that I'm not on top of these things to remember where was what). So I asked around for you, and I got two references: one is a paper called "Predicate dispatching: A unified theory of dispatch" which you should read; the second is a language called Cecil which implements these ideas.
03:53:24 (7) More than that, the kind of muti-argument dispatch that it gives you can also handle additional predicate conditions and even pattern-matching on fields etc, something that you should also be interested at, as Quadrescence said.
03:53:30 (8) Again, see (3) above. When you refer to this discussion, bear in mind that the absolutely only thing that I care strongly about in here is the fact that when I write (+ 1 2) I want that to add two numbers! This is the same motivation that was the motivation for lexical scope: I *don't* want you to be able to (set! + ...) (or `set!' some dispatching table or any other such change) in any way that changes that co
03:53:30 de.
03:53:36 (9) IOW, I want to write (define (add1 x) (+ x 1)) and know that when my function is given what I know as a number, it will return that number plus one, and nothing else. Note how making `+' a generic function (in a proper way, I'm not talking about the guile hack) means that I *cannot* rely on that -- given some library code that adds its own methods, this `add1' can do anything at all. If you're willing to work i
03:53:37 n such a world because "it's convenient", then pardon me for going with the principles that Scheme is built on and tell you "are you out of your mind??".
03:53:41 (10) Again, this is the only point that matters. Not knowing in advance what (+ 1 x) will do -- when I *want* to know that -- is IMO an extremely bad mode of work.
03:53:45 (11) WAT.
03:55:28 (12) gosh
03:56:32 -!- lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
03:57:30 What does "WAT" mean?
03:57:51 https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
03:58:11 Loosely related, at the ruby side.
04:02:07 eli: It's interesting that you consider your position on this subject to be consistent with "the principles that Scheme is built on", given that standard Scheme allows (set! + ...)
04:02:59 -!- xwl [~user@123.108.223.115] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:03:55 it seems to me that Racket has diverged quite a bit from the principles that Scheme is built on: the dynamic mutate-almost-anything tradition inherited from Lisp. Not that I think that's all bad. In fact I'm in favor of immutable pairs, for example.
04:04:43 Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme
04:05:59 mark_weaver: No, the set!-ing of `+' is not something that was desired on principle (only some people made it sound like that later on), it is an unfortunate result of not having any better tools to handle definitions other than via the toplevel.
04:06:27 As of r6rs, and going on through r7rs as it seems, that whole set! + thing is dead.
04:06:39 -!- leo2007 [~leo@222.130.140.148] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 24.0.97.1]
04:07:06 You can still do that at the toplevel, but that's now independent of what happens in my module, and specifically, I get to use the `+' I meant to use and not the one that you're allowed to bang away.
04:07:21 R6RS is also very far from the Scheme tradition. Does R7RS prohibit setting + ?
04:07:29 And with modules, IIUC, guile is in this world too.
04:07:51 R6RS is -- despite all the FUD that you seem to have absorbed -- not at all far from the Scheme tradition.
04:08:38 Witness the fact that when it comes to these issues of libraries/modules/whatever, R7RS is pretty much saying the same -- and that's when it set out with an explicit goal of preserving as much of the R5RS "spirit" as possible.
04:08:46 it's not FUD, R6RS is horrible
04:08:59 Go away troll.
04:09:22 eli: re: paper, I was bringing up alternative solutions to the extensibility problem. I see binary methods as a totally orthogonal problem.
04:09:32 asumu: OK.
04:09:56 mark_weaver: BTW, you can see the result of allowing such global set!-ing of global functions in older R5RS-based code.
04:09:58 (this is usually how they are treated in the OOP literature---not to say that is necessarily the right approach just because of that)
04:10:03 lol anyone who disagrees with your opinion is a troll, it's not just that you're unable to prove your own point
04:11:02 tomodo: R6RS had an informed module system and, IMHO, did some valuable prose re-organization to the document.
04:11:03 tomodo: No, I've talked about my point at length and on multiple occasions. You, OTOH, spit out an inflammatory comment without any reasoning or explanation whatsoever, hence you are a troll. Now go away, if you can't change.
04:11:19 And yes, saying it is "horrible" is not so constructive.
04:11:22 R6RS is very far from the Scheme tradition in at least three respects: (1) it is _much_ larger than any of the previous reports, (2) whereas previous reports leave a great deal unspecified, R6RS specifies far too much (IMHO), and (3) it broke the tradition of 100% consensus by the editors, and rolled over the dissent of many.
04:11:39 sstrickl [~sstrickl@racket/sstrickl] has joined #scheme
04:11:57 mark_weaver: My favorite example of such R5RS-isms is something that was happenning a lot in SLIB code, a classic example is: (define 1+ (let ((+ +)) (lambda (x) (+ x 1))))
04:12:28 Note that I'm not actually in favor of being able to (set! + ...).
04:13:01 mark_weaver: These kind of thing happen in libraries for two reasons: when people wanted to maintain some form of sanity, and when people wanted to write performant code. Either way, writing such a mess is a direct result of a deficiency in the language -- namely modules.
04:13:33 I fail to see a problem with size. Up to R5RS the documents were small, sure, but also fairly useless for large-scale programming.
04:13:35 mark_weaver: Re R6RS, do you *know* how big it is compared to R5RS and R7RS?
04:14:52 mark_weaver: ?
04:14:55 -!- tomodo [~tomodo@gateway/tor-sasl/tomodo] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
04:14:59 eli: do you expect a numeric answer to that question? I know that it's the first report that has been too long for me to have the patience to read through.
04:15:06 Sure.
04:15:16 Did you read through the draft R7RS?
04:15:30 most of it.
04:15:32 R6RS = 90 pages, R7RS = 81 pages.
04:15:35 FYI.
04:15:53 (Yeah, and R5RS is 50 pages.)
04:16:47 Note that the difference is tiny, especially given that R6RS has a proper syntax system specification whereas R7RS is silently avoiding it like the plague.
04:16:49 wasn't some of the contents of R5RS moved to the R6RS library report, which you're not including in that number? or am I remembering wrong?
04:17:58 mark_weaver: Either way, these are the sizes of the documents, yet people blindly chant that R6RS is huge therefore it's not Scheme-ish...
04:18:18 (yeah, I didn't include the library report---but that's more like R7RS large)
04:18:39 either way? am I right or wrong that some of the contents of R5RS has been moved to the R6RS library report?
04:18:51 (namely the standard procedures chapter)
04:19:22 Going on to your second point, "R6RS specifies far too much" -- you'll need to be concrete with that (and if you try that, you'll see that the places where it does specify more are tiny, but you *do* need to back that claim up)
04:19:32 -!- Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
04:20:15 And re #3 and breaking the tradition -- that's just a byproduct of the old committee being pretty much non-functional -- the 100% rule eventually made all progress grind to a complete halt, so R6RS *had* to change that if anything was to happen.
04:20:52 And indeed, the R7RS process (which, again, is explicitly trying to start from R5RS for whatever reason) adopts the same, and there is no 100% rule there either.
04:20:59 eli: what's your opinion of the objections raised in http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/R6RS/essay.txt ?
04:21:27 in particular (quoting from that document) "Andre van Tonder's observation that incompatibilities between the syntactic and procedural record layers create a modularity problem: You cannot define a new record type that inherits from an existing record type without knowing whether the base type was defined by the syntactic or by the procedural layer."
04:21:29 Will's points are about *very* specific points in R6RS.
04:21:41 Yeah, they were having a big fight about that.
04:22:00 Note that Will was a member of the R6RS committee until practically the last minute.
04:22:37 He just chose to retire then for reasons that I'll leave you to guess.
04:23:17 That's an example of how R6RS was rushed out over a very well-founded objection by a well-established person in the Scheme community, and as far as I can tell, he was right and R6RS got it wrong.
04:23:24 Note also that Will's later ERR5RS or whatever it was called, is mostly similar to R6RS, and note also that Larceny is only of the early adopters or R6RS.
04:23:43 Rushed??
04:24:07 Rushed in the sense that they weren't willing to take the time to make sure they fixed that problem properly.
04:24:14 "Rushed out" is just a meme people repeat to avoid getting into the details.
04:24:31 Who is exactly "they" that were not willing to take the time, do you know?
04:24:40 Earlier reports only specified things that were well understood and widely known to be good ideas.
04:25:05 (Not at all -- erlier reports did go into sticky issues like `eval' etc.)
04:25:14 But seriously -- who *are* "they"?
04:25:38 RITRedbeard [~RITReadbe@c-68-37-165-37.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
04:26:58 "they" are the ones who published R6RS. I don't remember who they are off-hand. Their names are not relevant to my point.
04:27:35 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-210-199-126.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
04:28:29 The point is, Will Clinger and Andre van Tonder raised objections about the record API, and those objections were not properly addressed before the report was published.
04:28:29 mark_weaver: Their names are extremely relevant! The people who set the timeline for R6RS were the steering committee -- and the people on that committee were mostly the same people on the R5RS committee.
04:28:48 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
04:29:09 tomodo [~tomodo@gateway/tor-sasl/tomodo] has joined #scheme
04:29:10 (Where "mostly" is "probably the same people, but I don't remember exactly")
04:29:43 Specifically, the actual editors of R6RS where not the ones who did any kind of rushing.
04:30:11 (Which is yet another aspect of that FUD -- the fact that people keep saying that they (the editors) rushed things out.)
04:32:02 While these details are perhaps relevant for either assigning blame or preventing similar mistakes from being made in the future, they do not pertain to my point, which is simply that the R6RS record API has at least one major flaw, and this flaw was pointed out before R6RS was published, nonetheless the flaw is still there.
04:32:23 -!- sstrickl [~sstrickl@racket/sstrickl] has quit [Quit: sstrickl]
04:32:32 leppie [~lolcow@196-210-191-3.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme
04:32:39 So to conclude we have (1) a small difference in size deltas, (2) no specifics on whatever is over-specified (I could tell you about some of the known points there, but it looks like you don't even know about them), (3) tradition broken, but unrelated to R6 and happily continued with same brokenness in R7.
04:33:07 Therefore that whole R6-is-the-devil is a house of cards.
04:33:11 -!- pyro- [~pyro@unaffiliated/purplepanda] has left #scheme
04:41:34 regarding (1), you are not including the library report, and ignored my question about whether some of the R5RS was moved to the R6RS library report and moved on to the next point, so I'm not convinced that comparing just the R6RS core with the entire R5RS/R7RS is a fair comparison
04:42:45 regarding (2) I don't have examples off the top of head, but I do not concede that point at all. I'll need to research it again.
04:43:37 regarding (3) I don't even understand what you mean by "tradition broken, but unrelated to R6" ???
04:43:41 Radium [~rajesh.na@117.203.11.31] has joined #scheme
04:45:05 -!- RITRedbeard [~RITReadbe@c-68-37-165-37.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
04:46:00 and although R7RS also no longer uses the 100% consensus rule, so far it seems much better that R6RS in terms of trying to forge a consensus. So far, it is clear that a much larger percentage of the Scheme community is happy with R7RS than was happy with R6RS.
04:48:15 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-175-228.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme
04:48:55 I stand by my points that R6RS (1) rolled over the objections of a large portion of well-respected members of the community, and (2) included some APIs which were already known to be flawed before the report was published.
04:50:26 Re (1), yes, R6 moved stuff to the library document, R7 intends to use the big language in pretty much the same way (and it looks like if this does happen, the overall product will be way bigger than R6); and re (3), the lack of unanimous rule was a necessity that R7 dumped just the same, if it's to be used as criticism of R6, then you should apply it to R7 too.
04:51:35 As for adoption -- I don't know how you reached a conclusion that R7 is having a much wider adoption when it's not even out, and when all of the R6 participants (and their respecive camps) are basically keeping extreme silence (and non-participation).
04:52:37 So for overall adoption there's nothing to do but wait, but on "trying to forge a consensus", I don't see anything done in R7 that wasn't also done in R6.
04:53:32 -!- fowl [~fowl@unaffiliated/fowlmouth] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
04:53:56 R7RS drafts are out, and I see people talking about it, and I see almost no objections to R7RS, whereas everywhere you look you find people unhappy with R6RS.
04:54:32 ThePawnBreak [Cristi@94.177.108.25] has joined #scheme
04:54:40 jonrafkind [~jon@racket/jonrafkind] has joined #scheme
04:55:08 the only real objections I see to R7RS are from the pro-R6RS people who want it retained and only slightly modified.
04:55:34 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:56:41 but I admit that these impressions I get of relative approval are not reliable
04:57:30 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
04:57:39 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-210-191-3.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
04:57:54 Most of the objections to R6 came from people who *are* the R7 people, hence the lack of motivation for R6 to participate or comment on the process...
04:59:39 If you take the Racket camp as a major one -- after numerous accusations of forming a "PLT Mafia" (many coming from people who are indeed on the R7 committee, including its chair) you won't expect these people to want any association with the R7 process...
05:00:26 Or if you take the Chez camp -- Kent is one of the brightest people in the Scheme world, yet he hasn't said a word on all of this, again, I'm guessing for similar reasons...
05:03:00 leppie [~lolcow@196-210-191-3.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme
05:04:49 I guess the R6RS camp is mostly happy with R6RS, and has no interest in a standard that is closer to the spirit of the earlier reports.
05:05:34 RITRedbeard [~RITReadbe@c-68-37-165-37.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
05:05:52 As I see it, the R6RS created a fork of the language, and why would they have any interest in participating in the other side of the fork they broke off from?
05:07:06 Mainly I wish that R6RS had chosen a different name, to reflect their very different philosophy of what Scheme should be.
05:07:43 I'm sorry but this is the same kind of FUD. R7 has broken off in many of the same ways.
05:07:53 R7RS is just trying to continue from where R6RS branched off.
05:08:10 No, R7 has explicitly started from R5, nothing else.
05:09:41 yes, R5RS was the last standard that follows the original Scheme philosophy of minimalism, of not specifying things that are not yet well understood, of leaving plenty of freedom for implementors to experiment, etc. That's what I mean by "where R6RS branched off"
05:10:58 What I'm saying is that there was no allusion to R6 branching off or some point that that was made. The only requirement -- which was made very explicit -- is to start from R5.
05:11:29 As for the "original philosophy of minimalism" -- if R7 *is* following that, how does it end up being the same size?
05:11:32 The R6RS camp wants a fully specified language for practical programming today, a very reasonable thing to want of course. This involves biting the bullet and specifying things that are not yet fully baked.
05:11:43 That is a nonsensical objection.
05:11:58 It's not an objection.
05:12:11 I think it's a very reasonable objective, and I appreciate its importance.
05:12:12 If you're referring to some parts that were not fully baked, then please specify what they are, please.
05:12:29 The record API is the more glaring example.
05:12:32 s/more/most/
05:12:47 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:12:54 The (two) record APIs come from *decades* of having them around.
05:13:17 of having them around where?
05:13:55 In all of the practical implementations, and in some cases, with more than one in a single implementation.
05:14:07 (The classic example of the latter is scheme48/scsh.)
05:15:23 Anyway, continuing from the comparison I was in the middle of making above: The non-R6RS camp wants to only standardize the things where there's a strong consensus, and to leave a great deal of freedom for experimentation and for future developments.
05:15:53 Neither Steele nor Sussman cite "minimalism" as a motivation for Scheme.
05:15:55 all of the practical implementations have _some_ record API, yes. but not the ones in the R6RS.
05:16:04 Well, they ended up standardizing pretty much the same thing.
05:16:34 (so regardless of if "minimalism" is currently a goal, it certainly was an original philosophy)
05:16:40 *was not
05:18:12 asumu: what do you make of the first paragraph of the introduction of the early reports?
05:18:20 Note also the point that is made very often -- that R6 comes from people who want a *practical* language, rather than some beautiful "gem-like" language; that note is coming exclusively from people who objected to R6, yet it is the basis for the decision to split the language into a big one and small one.
05:18:27 anyway, the fact of the matter is that the _standards_ are minimal.
05:19:22 (And note also that there is nothing happenning in the big language, hence ijp's comment about the big language being a bait-and-switch -- obviously everybody ended up caring about the small one, and the big one is noth much more than the canonical dumping ground for "features we don't want to talk about".)
05:19:52 Sure, I just think that should be justified without resorting to history.
05:20:09 no, they made a deliberate decision to focus on the small language first. work on the large language has been postponed until the small language is done.
05:21:07 Also, I worry that leaving things to the big language actually doesn't work for many things.
05:21:10 Yeah, that's indeed the official stance on the subject; in practice, I don't see anyone who cares.
05:21:13 Oleg's call/cc complaint is a good one.
05:21:27 You can't really just patch on delimited control as a library after the fact.
05:21:40 Same goes for procedural macros & modules.
05:22:24 it's not a dumping ground. the large language is for people who want a practical portable scheme with batteries included that represents the best APIs we can come up with, given our understanding today. and the small language will hopefully stand the test of time better, because it includes a much smaller set of features where there's stronger consensus and clearer understanding.
05:23:05 asumu's point is right on the spot here.
05:23:31 Some of the features that are deferred to the big language won't make much sense if they're there.
05:23:49 why not?
05:24:10 He gave two excellent examples: delimited continuations and procedural macros.
05:24:34 Delimited control and many other language features interfere. e.g., exceptions and parameters.
05:24:39 I've seen his arguments that delimited continuations are a superior abstraction with better properties than full continuations, and I agree with him.
05:26:07 it's a mistake to think that everything in the large language will necessarily be a "library" in the traditional sense of something that is external to the core implementation. some large language features may indeed be implemented at a very deep level in an implementation.
05:26:25 delimited continuations are of course an example of that.
05:26:26 Yes, but they may actually conflict with R7Rs small.
05:27:26 (won't say that they definitely will conflict; it depends on what delimited control operators you choose and to what degree you care if you can break that abstraction)
05:27:43 how will they conflict with R7RS small?
05:27:55 s/will/might/ ?
05:29:53 Parameterizations captured in a continuation may fail to respect the delimiters of a continuation if they aren't implemented in a particular way.
05:29:55 regarding the interference between exceptions, parameters, and delimited control. yes, I agree that's a danger. I'm not fresh on the details though.
05:30:32 It's hard to say for sure. My point being that delaying it means you have this uncertainty.
05:30:47 answer_42 [~answer_42@gateway/tor-sasl/answer42/x-66983568] has joined #scheme
05:31:36 -!- TDJACR [~TDJACR@lilug/member/tdjacr] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
05:31:38 -!- ray [ray@xkcd-sucks.org] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
05:32:59 as I recall, he was responding to a claim by foof that the delimited control operators could be implemented portably in terms of full continuations.
05:33:41 and he was arguing that such an implementation would not work properly, because it would interfere with exceptions and parameters.
05:33:42 ray [ray@xkcd-sucks.org] has joined #scheme
05:33:46 (as I recall)
05:34:03 and I'm reasonably sure that Oleg is right.
05:34:38 -!- lem_e_tweakit [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:34:58 however, it's a mistake to assume that if delimited control operators are only present in R7RS-large, that this means that they will be implemented in terms of the full continuations of R7RS-small.
05:35:10 -!- hash_table [~quassel@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
05:35:10 -!- getpwnam [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
05:35:33 therefore, I don't see the problem.
05:36:06 of course, any implementation of R7RS-large that supports delimited control should have a proper implementation of the control operators.
05:36:46 -!- cdidd [~cdidd@128-69-29-47.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
05:37:39 TDJACR [~TDJACR@lilug/member/tdjacr] has joined #scheme
05:39:32 Yes, which will mean changes to the small continuation code too. Unless you're going to allow call/cc to break the invariants of delimiters.
05:40:04 So it seems unlikely to be a modular addition.
05:40:46 -!- dnolen` [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
05:41:55 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:42:57 Anyway, I'm just saying it's a lot more difficult to add this after the fact than other libraries.
05:43:03 asumu: again, you are assuming that because two things are separated in the R7RS reports, that they also must be separated in the implementation.
05:43:18 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
05:44:29 This is not just about implementation. It's about what the right semantics are. If you're willing to actually change the semantics of existing constructs by moving to large, then fine.
05:44:44 it's not as if implementations are going to start by implementing only what's in R7RS-small, and then bolt on everything in R7RS-large after the fact.
05:44:55 (okay, I should avoid saying "right" semantics --- it is about compatible semantics)
05:45:16 That seems likely if R7 large is coming out several years after R7 small.
05:45:20 certainly that won't be the case with the fundamental control operators.
05:45:20 How else would they do it?
05:45:51 delimited control operators are already here, and several implementations already have them.
05:46:34 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme
05:47:12 The R7RS-small working group is understandably reluctant to nail down the semantics of somethign that may not yet be fully understood.
05:47:30 Delimited continuations are over 20 years old.
05:47:36 Err, no, not quite.
05:47:45 Actually yes, they are.
05:48:02 They're older than R5RS.
05:48:35 understanding comes from experience using them. the date of the paper where they were first described is not the most relevant date.
05:49:31 it has been a long time coming for them to be widely implemented, and then later still before they are commonly used. and it is not until they are commonly used that the more obscure warts become apparent.
05:49:32 asumu: IIRC, they precede call/cc.
05:50:12 eli: that's surprising, but nonetheless irrelevant. the fact is, people have been using call/cc for a long time, and the same cannot be said of delimited control.
05:50:26 well, that's not precise
05:50:29 Alright, but if you're aiming for a minimal standard... delimited control is the more expressive and minimal language construct.
05:50:47 what I meant is that relatively few people have been using delimited control. the numbers are growing of course.
05:51:10 mark_weaver: Also, (and again, IIRC), the objection to using call/cc vs a delimited operator is as old.
05:51:11 Though yes, they are not as widely implemented as call/cc.
05:51:25 I agree with you. it's already clear enough that delimited control seems more promising. I would be in favor of removing call/cc from R7RS-small entirely, and as I recall, Oleg argued for that as well.
05:51:25 I imagine partly because they are not standardized in anything.
05:52:51 probably true
05:55:00 -!- jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
05:55:18 anyway, it's late here, and time for me to sleep. good night all!
05:57:29 mark_weaver: Good night.
06:05:49 -!- mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
06:08:14 -!- chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
06:11:47 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:12:25 FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme
06:12:37 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@racket/jonrafkind] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
06:13:04 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
06:13:18 -!- wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:13:47 wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme
06:16:09 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:17:41 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-192-142.netcologne.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:17:50 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
06:19:00 chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme
06:20:40 -!- FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
06:23:34 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:24:40 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
06:25:26 -!- chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:27:40 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:29:27 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
06:31:03 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
06:57:49 chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme
07:11:44 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
07:16:46 tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has joined #scheme
07:24:29 cdidd [~cdidd@128-72-108-153.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme
07:32:53 bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
07:38:53 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:40:47 djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme
07:46:04 -!- answer_42 [~answer_42@gateway/tor-sasl/answer42/x-66983568] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
07:54:29 ijp [~user@host86-162-109-171.range86-162.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme
07:57:20 homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-184-138.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme
08:04:44 kvda [~kvda@124-168-182-229.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #scheme
08:08:39 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
08:10:09 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
08:19:15 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
08:26:24 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-120-65.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep]
08:31:07 lastwill [~will@bb1.reu.89-16-5-185.adsl.only.fr] has joined #scheme
08:46:47 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
09:05:19 ijp: The equivalence relation in `case,' indeed.
09:05:29 Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme
09:05:32 Who the fuck hard-coded it to `eqv?'?
09:26:24 -!- djcb [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
09:35:39 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme
09:43:34 antithesis [~antithesi@s51476e07.adsl.wanadoo.nl] has joined #scheme
09:56:04 masm [~masm@bl18-32-176.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme
09:56:11 -!- kvda [~kvda@124-168-182-229.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
10:11:43 xwl [~user@123.108.223.115] has joined #scheme
10:13:59 kvda [~kvda@124-168-182-229.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #scheme
10:23:53 -!- Fare [~Fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
10:24:56 -!- chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
10:32:57 amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme
10:41:15 chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme
10:47:44 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@188-143-65-33.pool.digikabel.hu] has joined #scheme
10:47:44 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@188-143-65-33.pool.digikabel.hu] has quit [Changing host]
10:47:44 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #scheme
11:12:46 -!- tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
11:16:23 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
11:16:58 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
11:18:29 -!- Radium [~rajesh.na@117.203.11.31] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
11:20:42 -!- pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-5f77b0fb.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services]
11:20:47 kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has joined #scheme
11:20:53 pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-4dbec16c.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme
11:22:15 Radium_ [~rajesh.na@117.203.2.165] has joined #scheme
11:27:37 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme
11:30:43 -!- amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
11:34:01 -!- chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:34:39 amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme
11:50:59 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
11:51:09 chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme
11:51:34 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
11:52:32 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
11:52:32 -!- bfig [~b_fin_g@r186-52-131-137.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:53:15 bfig [~b_fin_g@r190-135-9-208.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #scheme
11:55:56 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
11:59:47 acieroid` [~acieroid@wtf.awesom.eu] has joined #scheme
11:59:59 -!- acieroid [~acieroid@wtf.awesom.eu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:00:59 -!- amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
12:02:19 Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme
12:07:17 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme
12:08:07 -!- Radium_ [~rajesh.na@117.203.2.165] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
12:08:31 -!- acieroid` is now known as acieroid
12:10:02 -!- Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 23.2.1]
12:13:04 Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme
12:14:14 -!- kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7]
12:19:18 -!- Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:19:41 Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme
12:26:30 lem_e_tweakit [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
12:26:31 getpwnam [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
12:27:25 hash_table [~quassel@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
12:29:43 ijp` [~user@host86-183-35-170.range86-183.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme
12:31:17 -!- ijp [~user@host86-162-109-171.range86-162.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:32:29 tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has joined #scheme
12:40:38 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-210-191-3.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
12:41:04 Radium [~rajesh.na@117.203.6.81] has joined #scheme
12:42:52 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
12:44:10 -!- pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-4dbec16c.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services]
12:44:22 pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-4d067284.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme
12:45:01 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-35-143.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme
12:45:46 -!- ijp` is now known as ijp
12:46:54 leo2007 [~leo@123.123.252.85] has joined #scheme
12:54:46 -!- cyphase [~cyphase@unaffiliated/cyphase] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:30:07 jonrafkind [~jon@racket/jonrafkind] has joined #scheme
13:33:06 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:46:32 -!- Radium [~rajesh.na@117.203.6.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
13:46:43 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-175-228.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
13:48:33 -!- karswell [~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:58:48 karswell [~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme
14:03:02 amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme
14:05:15 kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has joined #scheme
14:07:33 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@racket/jonrafkind] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
14:07:51 huangjs [~huangjs@190.8.100.83] has joined #scheme
14:12:55 FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme
14:20:15 -!- chu [~mathew.ba@CPE-124-176-25-97.lns2.dea.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
14:27:37 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme
14:28:01 dnolen [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
14:31:52 -!- tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:32:00 tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has joined #scheme
14:32:47 jeapostrophe [~jay@s10.BMT-w1.vectant.ne.jp] has joined #scheme
14:32:48 -!- jeapostrophe [~jay@s10.BMT-w1.vectant.ne.jp] has quit [Changing host]
14:32:48 jeapostrophe [~jay@racket/jeapostrophe] has joined #scheme
14:36:45 annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
14:36:46 -!- annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
14:36:46 annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has joined #scheme
14:54:19 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
14:54:46 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
14:56:21 -!- jeapostrophe [~jay@racket/jeapostrophe] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
14:58:29 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-175-228.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme
15:00:05 -!- dnolen [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
15:04:44 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-175-228.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:06:19 -!- imphasing [~Alex@97-81-80-39.dhcp.athn.ga.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
15:07:07 imphasing [~Alex@97-81-80-39.dhcp.athn.ga.charter.com] has joined #scheme
15:12:42 lucasaiu [~user@gw.lipn.univ-paris13.fr] has joined #scheme
15:21:01 -!- lucasaiu [~user@gw.lipn.univ-paris13.fr] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
15:31:31 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
15:34:01 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
15:34:25 -!- FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:41:30 -!- rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
15:41:35 tupi [~david@189.40.13.116] has joined #scheme
15:41:36 rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has joined #scheme
15:41:52 -!- tomodo [~tomodo@gateway/tor-sasl/tomodo] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
15:43:00 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-222-106.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme
15:44:25 Radium [~rajesh.na@117.203.6.81] has joined #scheme
15:45:16 -!- Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:45:40 -!- kvda [~kvda@124-168-182-229.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
15:48:26 -!- Nisstyre [~yours@c-208-90-102-250.netflash.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
15:58:00 Nisstyre [~yours@c-208-90-102-250.netflash.net] has joined #scheme
15:58:32 -!- amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:58:42 amgarchIn9 [~amgarchin@p4FD61A29.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme
15:59:48 realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.120.65] has joined #scheme
16:03:17 -!- leo2007 [~leo@123.123.252.85] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
16:24:48 dnolen [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
16:29:47 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme
16:36:56 ijp` [~user@host86-130-197-39.range86-130.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme
16:38:24 -!- ijp [~user@host86-183-35-170.range86-183.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:38:29 -!- bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
16:51:22 bfgun [~b_fin_g@r186-52-164-11.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #scheme
16:52:39 -!- bfig [~b_fin_g@r190-135-9-208.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
16:55:25 -!- xwl [~user@123.108.223.115] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
16:56:32 -!- ijp` is now known as ijp
16:57:05 -!- doc_who [~doc_who@pool-96-241-42-178.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:57:39 -!- bfgun [~b_fin_g@r186-52-164-11.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:00:02 bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
17:02:28 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Quit: annodomini]
17:14:00 bfgun [~b_fin_g@r190-135-45-73.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #scheme
17:15:12 -!- SeanTAllen [u4855@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jazmgcjrvmcqthka] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:20:22 -!- bfgun is now known as bfig
17:22:06 mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #scheme
17:25:41 klutometis: regarding 'case' being hard-coded to 'eqv?', who cares? it's easy enough to add your own syntax. no matter how powerful the built-in 'case' was, there will always be times when some will wish it is yet more powerful, incrementally leading to fancy pattern matchers and beyond.
17:32:27 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@188-143-65-33.pool.digikabel.hu] has joined #scheme
17:32:27 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@188-143-65-33.pool.digikabel.hu] has quit [Changing host]
17:32:27 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #scheme
17:33:48 -!- youlysses [~user@75-132-17-145.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:34:53 do any scheme's perform the optimisations on case described by clinger (circa 2005)?
17:35:05 except, presumably, larceny
17:35:05 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35:14 fowl [~fowl@unaffiliated/fowlmouth] has joined #scheme
17:35:26 -!- wtetzner [~wtetzner@c-24-218-217-69.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35:46 http://scheme2006.cs.uchicago.edu/07-clinger.pdf
17:36:16 offby1 error in the year
17:36:47 mucker [~mucker@183.83.227.117] has joined #scheme
17:36:57 -!- jrslepak [~jrslepak@c-71-233-148-123.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
17:40:59 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
17:53:31 -!- lastwill [~will@bb1.reu.89-16-5-185.adsl.only.fr] has left #scheme
18:00:11 youlysses [~user@75-132-17-145.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com] has joined #scheme
18:03:36 tuubow [~adityavit@c-69-136-105-164.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
18:04:28 -!- youlysses [~user@75-132-17-145.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:06:36 -!- tomobrien [~tomobrien@host-92-2-79-163.as43234.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
18:09:17 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:12:15 answer_42 [~answer_42@gateway/tor-sasl/answer42/x-66983568] has joined #scheme
18:16:27 SeanTAllen [u4855@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xgcwypxlbrtsvqhq] has joined #scheme
18:20:38 FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme
18:24:19 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
18:32:02 -!- bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
18:37:28 albert-sicp [~albert-si@adsl-71-156-37-233.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme
18:37:37 *offby1* goes back to sleep
18:38:57 Does someone have experience with the mysql-client egg for chicken scheme?
18:41:18 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
18:43:23 -!- FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:44:59 albert-sicp: maybe someone on #chicken can answer
18:47:31 jao [~user@160.Red-81-39-169.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme
18:47:44 -!- jao [~user@160.Red-81-39-169.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Changing host]
18:47:44 jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has joined #scheme
18:49:25 albert-sicp: in general, it is better to ask your real question rather than just asking if someone "uses/has experience with/etc" some library
18:53:25 chicken-install -s mysql-client works. But i cannot execute (use mysql-client) in the chicken repl without error.
18:54:20 (checking in channel #chicken)
19:12:30 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-39-85.gmavt.net] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
19:18:47 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-184-138.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
19:19:42 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.120.65] has quit [Quit: Get MacIrssi - http://www.sysctl.co.uk/projects/macirssi/]
19:24:04 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
19:26:30 homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-129-51.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme
19:32:57 -!- dnolen [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
19:42:59 rudybot: and now for something completely different
19:42:59 ijp: Oh, here's a question for you. Why, whenever I upgrade PLT on Windows, does it first uninstall the existing version, then during the uninstall complain that it was not completely remove and ask me whether it should force the deletion.
19:45:27 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
19:56:44 ramrunner [~dsp@139.91.70.32] has joined #scheme
20:01:31 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #scheme
20:04:45 hey qu1j0t3 ;) i'm 2 days in reading coders at work , really nice. thanks again.
20:10:27 -!- ThePawnBreak [Cristi@94.177.108.25] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:13:45 -!- mucker [~mucker@183.83.227.117] has quit [Quit: leaving]
20:20:35 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
20:23:43 -!- tupi [~david@189.40.13.116] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:27:06 -!- albert-sicp [~albert-si@adsl-71-156-37-233.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:27:58 -!- acedia [~garland@unaffiliated/ffs] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:28:04 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:32:34 adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-253-53.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme
20:40:12 Guest17867 [tunes@nat/google/x-koppdrfkmaqznxfy] has joined #scheme
20:40:26 eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme
20:40:34 -!- Guest17867 is now known as FareWell
20:40:40 -!- FareWell is now known as FareTower
20:41:03 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has left #scheme
20:42:56 -!- eni [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Client Quit]
20:46:40 cyphase [~cyphase@unaffiliated/cyphase] has joined #scheme
20:51:26 -!- antithesis [~antithesi@s51476e07.adsl.wanadoo.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:59:28 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-35-143.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: No route to host]
20:59:49 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-35-143.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme
21:05:31 antithesis [~antithesi@s51476e07.adsl.wanadoo.nl] has joined #scheme
21:05:37 kudkudyak [~user@94.72.146.216] has joined #scheme
21:12:37 jeapostrophe [~jay@s10.BMT-w1.vectant.ne.jp] has joined #scheme
21:12:37 -!- jeapostrophe [~jay@s10.BMT-w1.vectant.ne.jp] has quit [Changing host]
21:12:37 jeapostrophe [~jay@racket/jeapostrophe] has joined #scheme
21:12:59 lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has joined #scheme
21:13:05 -!- mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
21:13:57 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
21:15:32 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme
21:21:34 -!- tuubow [~adityavit@c-69-136-105-164.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
21:26:02 acedia [~garland@unaffiliated/ffs] has joined #scheme
21:28:42 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-253-53.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu]
21:29:19 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-39-85.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme
21:41:54 -!- answer_42 [~answer_42@gateway/tor-sasl/answer42/x-66983568] has quit [Quit: leaving]
21:49:02 arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
21:51:59 -!- jeapostrophe [~jay@racket/jeapostrophe] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
21:52:23 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
22:01:26 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-222-106.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
22:02:11 adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-253-53.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme
22:06:40 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme
22:08:56 FRSHPRNCFBLR [~noone@CPE00222d560998-CM00222d560995.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme
22:27:29 albert-sicp [~albert-si@71.156.37.233] has joined #scheme
22:33:18 -!- wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: leaving]
22:33:33 wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme
22:33:42 jake__ [~jake@74.213.226.253] has joined #scheme
22:33:57 -!- antithesis [~antithesi@s51476e07.adsl.wanadoo.nl] has quit [Quit: yes leaving]
22:36:12 -!- wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Client Quit]
22:36:56 wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme
22:45:17 bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
22:45:34 -!- kudkudyak [~user@94.72.146.216] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
22:47:02 mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #scheme
22:47:22 -!- mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Client Quit]
22:47:39 mark_weaver [~user@209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #scheme
23:01:55 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
23:02:29 -!- albert-sicp [~albert-si@71.156.37.233] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:05:14 -!- FareTower [tunes@nat/google/x-koppdrfkmaqznxfy] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
23:06:54 -!- arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
23:07:31 -!- kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7]
23:07:33 -!- ijp [~user@host86-130-197-39.range86-130.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: The garbage collector got me]
23:09:33 Fare [fare@nat/google/x-oqkpzjyzxqiemvjd] has joined #scheme
23:13:21 -!- lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)]
23:15:27 -!- imphasing [~Alex@97-81-80-39.dhcp.athn.ga.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
23:19:08 arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #scheme
23:25:23 -!- bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
23:26:20 -!- acedia [~garland@unaffiliated/ffs] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
23:27:15 acedia [~garland@unaffiliated/ffs] has joined #scheme
23:27:59 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme
23:38:58 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
23:39:02 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-253-53.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu]
23:47:32 -!- lem_e_tweakit [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
23:47:57 -!- getpwnam [~ian@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
23:48:20 -!- hash_table [~quassel@70-138-242-181.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:51:56 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-35-143.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
23:53:28 adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-253-53.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme
23:56:21 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-26-188.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme